October 29, 2006

The Senate Races - Your Predictions on the Big 4

Nine days from now many of us will be glued to our seats, watching the election returns pour in. There seems to be a wide consensus on both (party) sides of the political pundit class that the Democrats will win control of the US House, though perhaps by only a small margin. The Senate? That seems much less clear. So, I turn it over to you, our dear readers, to tell us what you expect the Senate to look like in 2007. It appears that at this point most of the attention is focused on four races - those in Missouri, Virginia, Tennessee and New Jersey. Sure Debbie Stabenow could be upset or Lincoln Chafee could hang on - but most of the pundit have more or less suggested that the other 29 races clearly lean in one direction or another. But these four have seemed to be toss-ups for weeks. If the Democrats win three of them they'll probably have a Senate majority next year. If not, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will be the new Senate Majority Leader and the Democrats will have to deal with a much savier fellow running the place than the hapless retiring senator from Tennessee. So which is it going to be? Share your thoughts below.

Posted by armand at October 29, 2006 08:05 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Politics


Comments

Perhaps it's my pessimistic side, but I'm not yet ready to start popping Champagne for the US House yet (much less the US Senate). Yes, the national polling looks good. Yes, the polling in the individual races to re-take the House looks favorable (note: favorable doesn't mean "we'll win", it means we look like we might win). Look: incumbents have a 95%+ re-election rate. I really don't think we should take anything for granted; nor do I think we (this is the all-inclusive "we", as in "all of us who hate the present people running DC," not "Democrats," which I am not) should assume a victory. Too many variables, too much can change in a week, and the incumbancy factor is just too high.

So, to answer your question, I don't think the Dems can pick up the six seats necessary to re-take the Senate (much less win three of the four you mention).

Just sayin'.

Posted by: baltar at October 29, 2006 09:22 PM | PERMALINK

Oh I think it (a Democratic Senate) is unlikely too - as do most of the supposedly-wise ones who seem to be predicting a 4 or MAYBE a 5 seat Democratic pick-up in the Senate (though I think Charlie Cook is arguably the best of all these prognosticators, and he seems more bullish on the Dems chances than anyone else, so ... that's interesting). I'm just curious to see if anyone is willing to call any of those races because I think they could all go either way. Personally I'd rank 'em (in likelihood of a Democratic win) Missouri, Virginia, New Jersey, Tennessee - but that deliniation is separating them by the smallest margins imagineable, since, like I said, I think all 4 could go either way.

You're not confident of a Democratic House? Really? I'll be amazed if the GOP somehow holds onto the House. Nancy Pelosi might be elected Speaker by a tiny margin. And it'll be interesting to see how she manages the caucus given that the proportion of Blue Dogs is likely to grow. But if the GOP somehow manages to retain their majority there ... well, the Americanists will have to write a slew of new books on the triumph of negative campaigning - because that'll be an astonishingly successful tactical choice, and one unpopular parties are sure to want to emulate in the future.

Posted by: Armand at October 29, 2006 10:49 PM | PERMALINK

I'm just saying "don't count your chickens before they hatch." There are still nine days to go, and lots can happen (good and bad). And I stil believe in the power of incumbency: if the Dems take the House, it will be by a pretty damn thin margin (if at all).

Do you really think Pelosi will get the Speakership if the Dems win? I always assumed that she would get jetisoned.

Posted by: baltar at October 29, 2006 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

Jettison the leader of a winning team (which, as you note, will have accomplished the very difficult in knocking off several Republican incumbents)? I don't think so. Far to divisive a note to start the new Congress on - particularly if the Dems end up with a tiny majority.

Her image aside the current leadership has done a remarkably good job at staying united given how divided the caucus is ideologically (much more so than the Republicans are). I think the caucus will reward success and elevate her and Steny Hoyer to Speaker and Majority Leader (I guess Murtha's going to run against Hoyer - but if he does I expect him to lose). The big race will then be for Majority Whip - and that could be interesting.

And yes, you are right of course, the Republicans could keep the House. I'm just saying I don't expect it. And of course if it happens I'll be in a very dark stupor in the early morning hours of November 8th.

Posted by: Armand at October 29, 2006 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

As for your original point armand, I have to share the pessimism about the Senate - although a win is possible. I think NJ stays with the Dems - the undecideds in this race are just all going to end up voting like they always do - for the devil they know over the devil they don't. Look, NJ is kind of like the girl dating a jerk who flirts with the idea of leaving him and moving onto someone else, but in the end, returns to the original.

As for the other races, I think Missouri is the next most likely pick up, but its too close to call. Follow that by Tenn (definitely too close to call). Allen will hold on because the gay marriage amendment is on the VA ballot. Although the fact that ANYONE would vote for George Allen has to make you wonder about democracy itself...

Posted by: ryan at October 30, 2006 12:16 PM | PERMALINK

Huh. New Jersey is a girl dating a jerky guy (New York? Pennsylvania? The mind boggles.). That explains a bunch.

And all the toxic waste was what, zit cream?

Posted by: baltar at October 30, 2006 12:48 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?